Charles Matthews wrote:
See [[appeal to authority]]. It's not always a fallacy. I see that the "Five conditions for a legitimate argument from authority" now number _six_.
And interestingly enough, that very point refutes this as a legitimate appeal to authority: "The argument must be valid in its own right i.e. without needing to appeal to authority at all."
Since this whole discussion started because wikipedia doesn't evaluate whether arguments are valid, it's entirely reliant on an appeal to authority in the logical fallacy sense.
PS: I'm trying not to think of appealing to the authority of the wikipedia definition of appeal to authority to prove wikipedia is based on an appeal to authority fallacy. The circular and contradictory nature of doing so threatens to make my head explode.
Shane.